Kyle Lowry on Jim Rome

I listen to the Jim Rome Show just about every single day, and it just so happened that today I wasn't listening when they had Kyle on! No especially big news in here, just a 10 minute convo with Kyle on a few different subjects. Enjoy!

Guys, I've brought you all hear today to introduce you to our new crunch time big: Giant Rock. Giant Rock is expected to stay in the paint and help on every single blow by. We'll require either Amir or Patterson to push Giant Rock out of the key every 3 seconds, then push him back in.

“The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming minority.” - Martin Luther King

He should probably wait until we're a few games more over .500 before he publicly announces he wants to stay here. I'm optimistic, and don't think it will happen, but realistically we're one losing skid away from being a bottom barrel team again. Nobody wants to profess their allegiance to a bottom barrel team (except Derozan, which is why I love him). Lowry does say life is good in Toronto right now and seems pretty positive about the team overall. If we finish 3-5 seed and make a little noise in the playoffs I think it will be pretty easy to bring Kyle back. If some crap happens and we miss the playoffs or get swept in the 1st round then I'd expect it to be pretty hard to retain Kyle.

Kyle L. comes across as pretty smart and is playing it just right all around. Good for him. It's his first kick at the big contract and unlike some who have passed thru this town what I appreciate is that he gives no false pretenses...cough bosh cough...while playing hard and being a leader.

This whole situation with Kyle is reminding me of Chris Bosh. Few differences though.. Bosh was a max player, Lowry is not. Bosh had a market (lots of teams creating cap space), Lowry does not (many teams have a starting caliber PG). But from the point of view of whether or not Lowry is coming back... seems like a long shot to me.

You would have to show him the money and that's a dangerous game to play. Hope MU is comfortable on his thrown because he's got work to do in the summer.

There could be a "fun factor" we're ignoring. Lowry genuinely looks like he's having fun out there. So does the whole team actually. But if the Raps keep winning games, Lowry could choose to stay simply because he genuinely enjoys the fit/feel of this roster.

This whole situation with Kyle is reminding me of Chris Bosh. Few differences though.. Bosh was a max player, Lowry is not. Bosh had a market (lots of teams creating cap space), Lowry does not (many teams have a starting caliber PG). But from the point of view of whether or not Lowry is coming back... seems like a long shot to me.

You would have to show him the money and that's a dangerous game to play. Hope MU is comfortable on his thrown because he's got work to do in the summer.

Not similar to Bosh at all. Bosh left to play with the 2 best players in the NBA in Miami, he knew damn well he would win multiple championships by going there, and they still gave him a max deal. Bosh literally had no good reason to stay in Toronto. Better team, better weather, more recognition, winning, championships, south beach, same amount of money, etc....

The only teams that might offer Lowry a deal are not even close to Miami in terms of being contenders. I'd even argue that if he leaves he will almost certainly end up on a worse team than the Raptors.

This whole situation with Kyle is reminding me of Chris Bosh. Few differences though.. Bosh was a max player, Lowry is not. Bosh had a market (lots of teams creating cap space), Lowry does not (many teams have a starting caliber PG). But from the point of view of whether or not Lowry is coming back... seems like a long shot to me.

You would have to show him the money and that's a dangerous game to play. Hope MU is comfortable on his thrown because he's got work to do in the summer.

Historically, MU is VERY comfortable with that game. He overpaid in DEN to keep his free agents, then traded them later. If money is the object, I bet he'll pay Lowry whatever he needs to to re-sign him. If Lowry just wants to go elsewhere, there's not much we can do.

Its like any other negotiation, if you show weakness you lose. If Kyle says, "I am going to stay in Toronto," they probably low-ball him. He WANTS to be wined and dined, be in an OVO music video, feel loved. I'm okay with that. Hopefully it works out and he stays. Probably guarantees that they draft a PG if there's any concern. That's probably something to watch out for.

Historically, MU is VERY comfortable with that game. He overpaid in DEN to keep his free agents, then traded them later. If money is the object, I bet he'll pay Lowry whatever he needs to to re-sign him. If Lowry just wants to go elsewhere, there's not much we can do.

By historical I assume you meant the Nene deal.. but if you look at that deal, Nene was dealt for an inferior player. Letting Nene go may have actually been a wiser decision. They overpaid to keep him. If you over pay Lowry does he become harder to trade? And would then trading him mean that you would take on worse contracts that are even harder to move?

I don't know if MU would want to revisit that scenario because in my opinion it backfired... and that was for a player that seemed to have more of a market (as he was a big and probably more in demand) than I would imagine Lowry would have.

You don't want to lose a good player for nothing as that is bad asset management.. but it's even worse asset management when you trade him for inferior talent and/or worst contracts.

I am so happy we don't have BC, but I consider two of MU's biggest blunders in Denver were trading Afflalo and pieces (including draft picks) for Iggy (who was a rental) and the Nene for Mcgee/Turiaf trades. The Iggy/Afflalo trade could have worked out as the assumption was that if MU stayed as GM he would have resigned Iggy.. that may be true but was not a guarantee.

By historical I assume you meant the Nene deal.. but if you look at that deal, Nene was dealt for an inferior player. Letting Nene go may have actually been a wiser decision. They overpaid to keep him. If you over pay Lowry does he become harder to trade? And would then trading him mean that you would take on worse contracts that are even harder to move?

I don't know if MU would want to revisit that scenario because in my opinion it backfired... and that was for a player that seemed to have more of a market (as he was a big and probably more in demand) than I would imagine Lowry would have.

You don't want to lose a good player for nothing as that is bad asset management.. but it's even worse asset management when you trade him for inferior talent and/or worst contracts.

I am so happy we don't have BC, but I consider two of MU's biggest blunders in Denver were trading Afflalo and pieces (including draft picks) for Iggy (who was a rental) and the Nene for Mcgee/Turiaf trades. The Iggy/Afflalo trade could have worked out as the assumption was that if MU stayed as GM he would have resigned Iggy.. that may be true but was not a guarantee.

I completely disagree. The Nene trade was great - he got out from under that monstrous deal and got a role player and a player with upside on a rookie contract - so he had a controllable asset that he could choose to let walk (then Nene was kept to get a role player like Turiaf plus most of the cap space they would have if they had let him walk) or keep (in which case you have that young asset on the cost terms you set). McGee was a risk, but it was a pretty high upside risk - just the sort a starless team like DEN should be taking.

Similarly, if you get a chance at a player like Iggy and can unload what was seen as an overpaid contract at the time (Afflalo was another example of Ujiri locking up an asset then moving him later) that is again the sort of risk you should take as an organization.

I completely disagree. The Nene trade was great - he got out from under that monstrous deal and got a role player and a player with upside on a rookie contract - so he had a controllable asset that he could choose to let walk (then Nene was kept to get a role player like Turiaf plus most of the cap space they would have if they had let him walk) or keep (in which case you have that young asset on the cost terms you set). McGee was a risk, but it was a pretty high upside risk - just the sort a starless team like DEN should be taking.

Similarly, if you get a chance at a player like Iggy and can unload what was seen as an overpaid contract at the time (Afflalo was another example of Ujiri locking up an asset then moving him later) that is again the sort of risk you should take as an organization.

I think we'll disagree and that's cool.. but first Turiaf was waived immediately after he was traded.. so he wasn't really considered in the transaction (he was simply acquired to make the dollars work). Nene was swapped for McGee. McGee was given a 4 year $44M extension in the summer (as opposed to the 5 year $67M for Nene), and Mcgee only played in 20 games for Denver following the trade. McGee's contract is bad.. he's not a good player and is making a lot of money. That can be crippling for a team. Nene > McGee and the difference in salary is $2M per year (with an extra year for Nene). Both bad contracts in my opinion. If Lowry is going to get a bad contract will he be traded for an equally bad contract?

If he resigned Nene but got a good player back (or a set of good players back like the Gay trade) then it would been a good move in hindsight.. but Nene is a much better player than McGee despite their age difference.. I think for Denver it would have been better just to reclaim some cap space back.

As for the Afflalo trade he has a very reasonable contract (compare his salary to DeMar's for example)... they also gave up a first round pick which could be in the lottery (assuming both Denver and NY fail to make the playoffs which is possible), and a 2nd (but that's not really that relevant) for a rental. Iggy may have come back but we will never know and it was a huge risk to give out that much for a guy that could leave at the end of the season (which he ended up doing). As a fan I would be so mad at the teams' front office for giving up that much for a one year player. That would be like trading Amir Johnson, a first round pick (potential lottery) and a 2nd rounder for Deng.

This whole situation with Kyle is reminding me of Chris Bosh. Few differences though.. Bosh was a max player, Lowry is not. Bosh had a market (lots of teams creating cap space), Lowry does not (many teams have a starting caliber PG). But from the point of view of whether or not Lowry is coming back... seems like a long shot to me.

Biggest difference from the Bosh situation: a CBA which prohibits teams from going into the luxury to acquire players via sign-and-trade. That really shrinks the number (and quality) of teams that can make a pitch for Lowry.

I think we'll disagree and that's cool.. but first Turiaf was waived immediately after he was traded.. so he wasn't really considered in the transaction (he was simply acquired to make the dollars work). Nene was swapped for McGee. McGee was given a 4 year $44M extension in the summer (as opposed to the 5 year $67M for Nene), and Mcgee only played in 20 games for Denver following the trade. McGee's contract is bad.. he's not a good player and is making a lot of money. That can be crippling for a team. Nene > McGee and the difference in salary is $2M per year (with an extra year for Nene). Both bad contracts in my opinion. If Lowry is going to get a bad contract will he be traded for an equally bad contract?

If he resigned Nene but got a good player back (or a set of good players back like the Gay trade) then it would been a good move in hindsight.. but Nene is a much better player than McGee despite their age difference.. I think for Denver it would have been better just to reclaim some cap space back.

As for the Afflalo trade he has a very reasonable contract (compare his salary to DeMar's for example)... they also gave up a first round pick which could be in the lottery (assuming both Denver and NY fail to make the playoffs which is possible), and a 2nd (but that's not really that relevant) for a rental. Iggy may have come back but we will never know and it was a huge risk to give out that much for a guy that could leave at the end of the season (which he ended up doing). As a fan I would be so mad at the teams' front office for giving up that much for a one year player. That would be like trading Amir Johnson, a first round pick (potential lottery) and a 2nd rounder for Deng.

So Nene had a bad contract, and was traded for two expiring contracts, so you assume that because Ujiri chose to extend McGee that Lowry must be traded for a bad contract? That makes no sense to me.

The key to the Iggy deal is the relationship Ujiri has with players. I'm very confident Iggy would have resigned in DEN had Ujiri stayed. To pull off that trade, so must Ujiri have been. Afflalo's contract looks decent this year, but at the time of the trade he was consistently getting out performed by DeMar, and their contracts are not drastically different. The other key is that they traded a first that was the worst of their two picks (which, if Iggy stays, which I insist was extremely likely had Ujiri stayed, would end up in the 20's), and still maintain the possibility of a high draft pick regardless of how the team plays. And note that your example is flawed - it would be more like trading DeMar, the worse of our 2016 pick and NY's 2016 pick, and a 2nd rounder for Deng. Except before DeMar had played well this year.

So Nene had a bad contract, and was traded for two expiring contracts, so you assume that because Ujiri chose to extend McGee that Lowry must be traded for a bad contract? That makes no sense to me.

I understand that McGee was an RFA and thus a potential expiring contract.. but he got resigned. If McGee was let go then what would be the point of even resigning Nene? McGee was a big risk (and I get the no reward without a risk strategy) but he was bad in Washington, a bit of a bone head, and was worse than Nene. And he was re-upped. And that's the point. If Lowry is given a bad contract (and its possible with his all-star caliber play) then wouldn't he be harder to move if the franchise wanted him to be dealt? If he were to be traded, could he not return equally bad contracts in return? If he was traded for expiring contracts (which by the way is not an easy proposition) then why even resign him in the first place (you still did not get any assets back and you just delayed your cap space by one season)? Keep the cap space and go after better talent in free agency or make lop sided trades in their favour? McGee is not going to be an easy guy to trade.. much harder than Nene was despite their age and salary differences. And that's the fear I have with Lowry. He gets resigned, but then traded for an equally bad contract but one that's even harder to move. Or if he gets traded for expiring contracts why even bother resigning him in the first place?

DanH wrote:

The key to the Iggy deal is the relationship Ujiri has with players. I'm very confident Iggy would have resigned in DEN had Ujiri stayed. To pull off that trade, so must Ujiri have been. Afflalo's contract looks decent this year, but at the time of the trade he was consistently getting out performed by DeMar, and their contracts are not drastically different. The other key is that they traded a first that was the worst of their two picks (which, if Iggy stays, which I insist was extremely likely had Ujiri stayed, would end up in the 20's), and still maintain the possibility of a high draft pick regardless of how the team plays. And note that your example is flawed - it would be more like trading DeMar, the worse of our 2016 pick and NY's 2016 pick, and a 2nd rounder for Deng. Except before DeMar had played well this year.

Ujiri could have been confident (I love a GM with confidence) but it still might not have worked out.. Iggy may have liked the idea of playing with a super star like Curry as opposed to nobody really in Denver. Or going to California instead of a cold weather town like Denver. So that risk does exist. Even though it was the worst of theirs and NY's pick it was still unprotected (and if Iggy left that pick could have been a lottery pick.. why didn't MU consider that before sending that pick back to Orlando).

As for the hypothetical example... trading a 23 year old DeMar (and his RFA status) with a first round pick (unprotected) and a 2nd rounder for an expiring contract is an extremely risky trade.. one that I wouldn't do (the expiring contract walks, I lose a young prospect and a first round pick). Now if the pick was protected or if the player wasn't really that good.. I'd think about it harder. Afflalo despite his last season in Denver was still a good player and was still on a reasonable contract. Not putting a protection on that pick though was a dumb idea.